I was sent this account from an anonymous participant at a recent Tax Seminar given by the US embassy in Norway. It was held in the basement fellowship hall of the local American church.
The participant did not want his name used, but did want to publish his account of the event.
I have agreed to provide the vehicle for this on Isaac Brock. This report is provided so others could hear what is being presented to Americans Abroad, at least in this one formal setting in Norway. Not sure that it represents any other countries approach to the problems of U.S. Citizenship taxation. I have been assured that the events written about, happened as described, with characterizations those of the sender.
The participant writes:
Invitations to this tax seminar went out by general media—-word of mouth, Reps abroad, Dems abroad, American women abroad organizations. In a slightly modified form, the invite looked like this:
Invitation:
The U.S. Embassy will host a Tax Seminar at the American Lutheran Congregation on Thursday, January 31, 2013 from 6:30 -8:30 pm.
An IRS Tax Attaché (name withheld) from the Internal Revenue Service Office at the U.S. Embassy in London will be the guest speaker and will present information on tax issues for U.S. citizens overseas. After the presentation, there will be a question and answer session.
If you are interested in attending the Tax Seminar, please contact the U.S. Citizen Services section by e-mail at xxxxxx@state.gov Please bring you passport for identification to the Seminar.
Personal note: This was apparently an invitation for attendance by sign-up only. No unregistered walk-ins allowed.
I replied to that email address, and the confirmation came back with an IRS logo cut and pasted to look official, I guess.
Thank you for your interest in the Tax Seminar. We have added you to our guest list. We look forward to seeing you there.
Seminar:
On the day of the seminar there were ~45 attendees and they filled about half the seats in the assembly hall. Since registration was required by email, the reception was manned by 3 women with the list of the attendees names spread out equally in front of them on four sheets of paper. Two Local (in-country secret service?) agents guarded the exterior and entryway of the church.
The first greeting received at the door was “We need id!” I see now that the invite stated one should bring one’s PASSPORT. One gentlemen had politely told them no, (unsaid if whether he forgot for flatly refused), which was first met with a negative response and tone, but was corrected by the woman in the center who allowed that gentleman in. All attendees were checked off the list.
A pamphlet with some tax basics and an assembly of IRS due dates and telephone help numbers was provided at the door.
Introduction:
The introduction was by the Ambassador, whose senior staff administrator was at his side. He stated that his philosophy was that every person should be able to file their own taxes. He finished the introduction, then stated that this was the last opportunity to ask him questions. (Note: I guess he did not want to be part of the Q & A at the end of the session.)
Audience profile:
The audience primarily consisted of 45+ persons. There were a few people that looked obviously like young corporate-sponsored family types, whose accountants certainly ought to have been doing things correctly during their short stay. However, the majority of the audience were long-term Norway residents who had just learned of the offshore jihad FBAR and FATCA searches via media reports.
None of them mentioned they had received any helpful advice or instruction from US government about what to do. There was no indication that any were using tax accountants. None exhibited strong understanding of the various form(s) requirements. Some of the attendees were:
–A woman who had lived Norway for 40 years and had never known that she ought to have been filing.
–A 65+ man, who spoke bad English, who had obviously found out the consequences of being a U.S. person.
–A U.S. person (male) with good English, who was there not only in his own interest, but also in the interest of the widow of his U.S. father.
– -A man in his 50’s with an East Coast accent, whose local wife was programming FATCA software at the bank.
–The balance were people who had no accountants and had little understanding of the concepts of filing U.S. tax forms with all the complexity of ‘excluding this” and “crediting that” and FBAR’ing your bank accounts. The majority did not seem to understand the basics of filing.
The Presentation:
The presentation was made by a very average woman approximately 50 years old, who had come from the head European office. She presented herself as the IRS Tax Attaché and much of her background was audits and penalties. You would have thought that someone who had experience in actual income tax ‘filing ‘questions would have been a better choice. That is who people wanted to hear from—rather then a message delivered from a “Penalizer”.
The presentation was just horrible.
Obviously she no experience or expertise on how to present a subject in an organized manner to an audience. She began babbling, continued babbling, and finished babbling. She mentioned declarations, exclusions and credits, but gave no form numbers or explanations of how or why. She provided little in the way of the overall filing principles and processes.
She mentioned the FBAR, but gave no explanation about its contents. FATCA Form 8938 wasn’t mentioned by name. She told all kinds of side stories about tax evaders. She talked periodically about the US / Norway tax treaty, which actually was not even part of her area of expertise or policy authority. (IMO, that is the policy business of the Ambassador, and he should have spoke to it).
She threw in lots of little barbs about tax evaders, hah, hah, hah. At one point, she mentioned harshly how audits could be done. “We might actually travel up to this country and perform the audit here”
FBAR questions:
She was questioned as to how many FBAR’s had been filed previously, to which she emphatically responded “millions”, with a facial expression, body language, and delivery as if she knew that this not to be true. Or, to be fair, maybe she was talking about the total number of FBARs filed since the beginning of the 1970 Bank Secrecy Act! There certainly are NOT millions filed yearly.
Some of the things she said during her babble, made me wonder if she had been reading the Brock site. If not, she either was ignorant herself, or she out and out lied about the number of FBAR forms filed.
She stated the penalties for FBAR incorrectly, and had to be prompted to mention that the $10,000 penalty could be per account per year for a non willful failure. The difference between ‘nonwillful’ penalties and ‘willful’ penalties was not discussed. The $100,000 penalty never got mentioned, whereas the 50% penalties were bundled together with the $10,000 penalties.
OVDI was not mentioned. A ”streamlined procedure” for past failures was mentioned but not explained. She said often that people should file if they hadn’t been doing so, and that they should include an extra explanation as to why they had not been filing.
Record Keeping:
She stated that people should maintain their records for 4 years, then burn them. This was followed by her cute story about shoe boxes with year numbers on them. (Shouldn’t that be 7 years?)
Benefits of Citizenship:
At one point, the Tax Attaché started talking about enjoying the benefits of citizenship. At this point, the ’40-yrs-in-Norway’ lady responded “What benefits?”. To that question, she responded correctly “You have the right to enter the United States and work whenever you like” (and no more). That was the sole benefit. This was the answer that made me suspicious that she had been reading IBS. 🙂
The “R” word raised:
At one point, a woman asked “What about the number of renunciations connected to this”? The ambassador’s assistant squirmed around in her chair and answered by saying renunciations would be met with strict enforcement and audits, and that no one should consider renouncing if their intention is to escape tax.
Renunciation consequences:
The Tax Attaché further stated that the act of renunciation could result in serious consequences of not being allowed back into USA and some other negative blah, blah, blah. She then went on to explain some of the filing procedures for renunciations—of filing first a citizen tax form and then filing a final non resident alien tax form for the remainder, etc, etc. She was corrected by the embassy staff assistant and implied that some of the threats mentioned were not totally accurate. She had been squirming uncomfortably in her chair during this part of the discussion. I don’t think she wanted the conversation to go this direction.
U.S. Tax Policy Questions:
There were a number of questions that were related to policy—why the US taxes its citizens? Why did they make these laws? When will they stop taxing citizens overseas, etc.? The Tax Attaché answered them. Neither the Ambassador nor his staff assistant attempted to do their job and to represent the U.S. policy! They let the Tax Attaché babble out the answers for questions which had nothing to do with her authority or expertise.
Visa disagreement:
The Tax Attaché mentioned that after some people renounce, their company wants to send them back to USA to work again. She stated that a U.S. visa is then granted, and then ridiculed the person who would do such a thing in the first place. As she was stating that a visa for those that renounce would be granted, the Ambassador’s assistant visibly upset bounded out of her chair and blurted out a comment implying something like “we won’t allow that to happen here”.
In Conclusion, Mission Accomplished?
The presentation by the Tax Attaché ended without a request for further questions. However, she did say to ask questions after the break, one on one, to the U.S. representatives in attendance.
In my opinion, her presentation consisted of babble and showed no real comprehensive understanding the process of filing taxes overseas and impacts on Americans abroad. The content was of NO useful value to people who already had a reasonable background in these matters. For newbies, they gained little but new twinges of fear.
What she did accomplish, was to weave in enough threats of penalties and examples of evaders to make the point, “you must comply”. Her advice was to file the required forms and attach a nice letter with the filing explaining why it hadn’t been done so previously. This was pleasantly presented and primarily received with courtesy. There was no explanation about what constitutes reasonable cause, what was a ‘low risk’ profile, and how the IRS will review, accept or reject, and what the audit probabilities were. However, we were certainly informed about the penalty potentials for failure to comply!
What happened to the Attendance List?
At the end of the meeting, a woman who had lived 40 yrs in Norway asked what they were going to do with the attendee list. The senior staff consulate woman stated that it would not be kept. However, the emails which were received by the embassy to request attendance, and the confirmation emails sent back out on an IRS letterhead couldn’t be erased, could they? Don’t they live forever on email servers?
A Plea to the Ambassador:
One gentlemen then pleaded the case to the Ambassador, beginning by asking him to write a report to the Executive branch (he visibly stumbled as if he couldn’t stomach saying the president’s name), explaining that none of the people in the room understand how to do their U.S. taxes, as it is so complex.
The Ambassador’s first response was something like, “Well,… NOW they do, don’t they?”
The gentleman further stated that people don’t come to this country to evade taxes (top marginal rate nears 50%). To which, the Ambassador escalated the discussion further—stating that “They just needed to file!” End of story. “They (IRS?) aren’t after normal people. They are after rich people with millions of dollars. “
To which the gentleman responded that “No, they are not just after the rich, they were also looking for normal people. As of Jan 1, 2013, with FATCA, they were looking at all of their accounts (and his) and ordering the Norwegian banks to go out and find US persons. “
The Ambassador did not seem to comprehend what was happening with FATCA at all. His response was to the tune of “What are you hiding?” “If you don’t have much money, they won’t get you. They are not after you if you don’t have a bunch of money. Just file it, Use form 7770, it only takes ten minutes.”
To this, the gentleman (in his 50’s) responded that indeed people his age ought to have some retirement savings (which could be construed as “being rich”), and that the penalties that they were giving out were not just about filing today, but also about failure to file for the last eight years.
The Ambassador had only been in Norway a couple years, so he apparently couldn’t understand anything about the past IRS OVDP processes.
During the ensuing conversation, the Ambassador stated a number of times to “Just file it, what are you hiding?” And, final warning, “You better file them now or the penalties are gonna be a lot worse later!”
Get Professional Help
His last response was “If you have money, then you should have been getting professional help.” (contrary to his intro speech about filing your taxes yourself)”. By this time, the body language of the Ambassador looked like he was going to club the guy with his cane.
Time for cookies and coffee
At this point, other people began cutting in, as the coffee and cookies were ready and many people were anxious to have a private chat with the Ambassador. A number of ‘Stepford-wives’ types told the gentleman that they had just sent their FBAR’s in, and they hadn’t gotten any penalties. (YET!)
The event broke to cookies and coffee.
The gentleman left, and at that time you could notice that the 2 or 3 US ‘agents’ in the room had their eyes open and watching carefully.
Seminar purpose? Scare the bajeebers out of you?
So, as you can see, this event provided no useful instruction about how to do ones U.S. taxes. The majority of questions really related to policy questions, to which the Ambassador did not respond or help with. The Ambassador never elucidated on any U.S. taxation policy matters, a subject the audience had a keen interest in.
The event, however, did succeed in its main objectives, which was to take attendance, to encourage and scare the bajeebers of never-before-filers. Mission accomplished with this audience of older residents who have had no idea that the government of their ‘person hood’ has been preparing to ‘frag’ them with FATCA.
In my opinion, this meeting seemed to show that, under pressure, the Ambassador was chosen to deliver a message, “We are going to get “rich people!” (the definition of which could be adjusted according to current political whim). He was perfect for the job, because of his innate narrow perspectives of what living abroad means.
Bottomline, the US citizens in Norway were to follow the orders of the US government & his boss, period! He was not here to serve the interests or concerns of the US citizens living there. There was absolutely zero recognition of, or consideration for, the innate innocence of the U.S. ‘persons’ present in Norway!
The meeting also showed that the person leading the professional embassy staff was one who believed that the US citizens living in Norway must follow the laws of USA. Renunciations will be processed under her authority, and will not be viewed favorably.
This presentation confirmed for me that the US ambassador solely represents the Executive Branch of the United States. That ought not to be a surprise. His job includes the duty to see that the citizens located in Norway follow U.S. tax laws. He does not represents the interests of the citizens that reside here. It is not his job to report their concerns back to the USA. His executive duties are not like those of a Congressman who works for constituency interests. As an Ambassador, he has one constituent, the US State Department and by extension the President. U.S. Citizens in Norway were not his constituents, and he did not appear interested in advocating for their interests.
However, he does arrange for good cookies and coffee! 🙂
What an invaluable account. Thank you so much to the person who reported on it, and Just Me for posting it here. This is exactly the type of thing that needs to be made public. No doubt the Ambassador was another *major fundraiser for Obama – similar to our own (soon to be replaced by a clone?) Ambassador Jacobson.
Is there some way to relay this to the TAS Taxpayers Advocate Nina Olson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_the_Taxpayer_Advocate ? Anonymously via SAMS the Systemic Advocacy Management System (SAMS) at the very least?
The mandatory passport and ID requirement for the session is scary too. Since when do people outside the US have to present ID to hear a public presentation by the government? Even if in the short run, the US IRS were to use attendance at the meeting as proof of future willfulness, in the long run, it runs counter to the IRS claim that their true purpose is to ‘encourage’ compliance and ‘bring people back into the system’. Wouldn’t that scare people away from seeking information? Is that what they want? Is it a new in-person equivalent of the IRS recording information on visits to the new IRS website, – and no doubt recording telephone and e-mail information requests?
There is obviously no concern whatsoever for those US citizens, or their rights (or those entirely imaginary ‘benefits’) . Only enforcement. And, not even any logical or practical effort to assist those to comply, though they were being exhorted and threatened – presumably to encourage compliance. Resulting in either reluctant compliance and then renunciation, or non-compliance, or partial compliance with inadvertent errors- resulting in penalty revenues for the US.
And also it is obvious that renunciation of US citizeneship is a tender point – which is why collecting and reporting on the data is so invaluable.
About the US ambassador to Norway – as posted on the Embassy site:
“Ambassador White emphasized the commitment shared by Norway and the U.S. to promoting human rights, democracy, and freedom throughout the world. He said that he looked forward to working to preserve and build upon this invaluable relationship… “………
……….”Prior to his appointment as Ambassador, Barry White served for over 13 years as Chairman and Managing Partner (CEO) of Foley Hoag LLP, where he was a senior partner in the firm’s business, corporate, international and government strategies practice areas. He practiced law at Foley Hoag for 40 years. http://norway.usembassy.gov/ambassador2.html
and, according to http://www.allgov.com/news/appointments-and-resignations/ambassador-to-norway-who-is-barry-white?news=839939
“……..he has served on the finance committees of many Democratic senators and congressmen.
White was an early supporter of Barack Obama. In June 2007 he began organizing Massachusetts lawyers for ObamaAccording to OpenSecrets.org, White *bundled between $100,000 and $200,000 for Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign. Along with his wife, Eleanor, he has contributed more than $100,000 since 1989 to candidates, of which 98% has gone towards Democrats.
White’s other activities include involvement in the American Bar Association (Business Section and International Section)”………..
See also: http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/08/obamas-elevates-three-more-big.html
I know a little something about Foley Holey. All I can tell you is if you shake hands with a lawyer from that firm make sure you count all of your fingers afterwards.
Let’s see: Norway should get a pair and do to that IRS agent what Iceland did to FBI agents. The IRS agent has no authority in Norway to enforce US laws, but she says, well, “We might actually travel up to this country and perform the audit here.” The Norwegian government should be informed of this.
And if Norway doesn’t want to do anything perhaps it’s time to re-establish the old American tradition of tarring and feathering.
From Internal Revenue Manual
9.11.2.4 (11-08-2005)
Foreign Travel
1.
This subsection contains administrative procedures governing foreign travel and includes:
•
requests for authorization to engage in foreign travel
•
travel to Canada
•
travel by United States Flag Air Carriers
•
passports
•
immunization requirements
•
firearms policy
9.11.2.4.1 (12-16-2011)
Requests for Authorization
1.
Requests for authorization for a special agent or other CI personnel to engage in foreign travel will be obtained by submitting standard Form 1321 (Rev. 11-2008) to the Deputy Commissioner, Large Business and International (LB&I) through the Executive Director, International Operations (CI:IO). Form 1321, known as an Authorization for Official Travel, should be submitted to International Operations (CI:IO) no later than thirty (30) days from the expected date of travel. A Form 1321 is submitted by the SAC of the respective field office with the concurrence of the Director, Field Operations. The form must be signed by the Deputy Commissioner, Large Business and International (LB&I) prior to any foreign travel being conducted. The Director, Field Operation’s office will forward the entire package to the “CI-HQ-International Foreign Travel Request” mail box. International Operations (CI:IO) will forward the package to the Manager, Tax Administration Advisory Services (TAAS) Division (LB&I) for approval. Upon final approval of Form 1321 and receipt of country clearances, the employee will be notified and provided electronic copies of the clearances.
2.
Travel to foreign areas may require a security clearance if official duties are being performed at an Embassy or Consulate. The valid levels of security clearances are Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret. If the special agent does not have a Secret or Top Secret clearance, they can request an “Interim Top Secret” clearance from the Personnel Security Office.
3.
A separate Form 1321 must be submitted for each traveler.
4.
A Form 1321 must contain the following information:
A.
Section 1 – Traveler Information – Name of traveler (first, middle, and last name); traveler’s country of birth; traveler’s official duty station; traveler’s official passport number (if the traveler’s official passport application is in process, include the date and place filed (see subsection 9.11.2.4.4, Official Passports, for information regarding the use of official passports by IRS employees and officials). Traveler should specify if travel will include personal travel or rest periods (if applicable, traveler should provide detailed justification in Section 8 of the forms).
B.
Section 2 – Type of Travel Requested – Specify type of travel requested and mode of transportation. Provide travel dates (include annual leave days if scheduled during the same period and the specific dates of travel) and the cost of airfare.
Note:
A copy of the SATO itinerary must be attached.
C.
Section 3 – Employee Health, Safety, Laptop/PDA Security and Government Credit Card Exemption Request – Traveler should place a check mark on the applicable items.
D.
Section 4 – Approving Officials’ Signatures for Business Class or International Travel and Cyber Security
E.
Section 5 – International Travel and Government Credit Card Exemption Authorization
F.
Section 6 – International Travelers Information – Traveler should indicate their office address – Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigation mailing address (no Post Office boxes), telephone number, office e-mail, fax number and indicate specific type of security clearance held – if standard, state “None.” Purpose of travel – Description of unique circumstances of the investigation/assignment that makes it necessary for CI personnel to conduct foreign travel, including whether the travel is related to an income tax or money laundering investigation. When travel is related to a grand jury investigation, include a statement that the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) handling the investigation has been consulted and concurs with the purpose of the travel (see subsection 9.11.2.4.1(5)). It is not necessary to provide the details of the investigation, just the reason that travel is necessary. Traveler should list hotel information where he/she will be staying – Name, address, and phone number. Traveler should indicate emergency contact information.
G.
Section 7 – Request for Business Class Travel
H.
Section 8 – Business Class Justification and or Credit Card Exemption Request
I.
Section 9 – Traveler should list all foreign countries to be visited. Traveler should list Criminal Investigation case name and CIMIS number – If applicable. Expressions of interest – on the part of the countries to be visited – include names and titles of host government officials contacted; and/or American Embassy contacts; and any information provided by the American Embassy concerning the visit. Provide a copy of the invitation letter from taxpayer(s)/subject(s) or their representative(s) (if applicable) and name and nationality of individual(s) to be contacted (include verification they have consented to this meeting).
5.
When travel is related to a grand jury investigation, the Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) handling the investigation should be consulted and must concur with the purpose of the travel.
6.
An application for an official passport and Foreign Travel Request (FTR) should be made as soon as foreign travel is anticipated. If the traveler has a current personal passport or a personal or official passport that expired within the past 15 years, these requests should be made no later than 30 business days from the expected date of travel. If the traveler never had a passport, or it expired more than 15 years ago, these requests should be made no later than 45 business days from the expected date of travel.
7.
Foreign Travel Requests for multiple countries should be submitted as soon as possible. These requests require additional time to secure all necessary country authorizations and clearances for travel.
8.
Emergency FTRs will be handled as expeditiously as possible. However, it is incumbent upon field personnel to ensure that these types of requests are rare exceptions dictated by special circumstances. In these instances, no assurances can be made that the travel authorization will be obtained by the specified travel dates. As soon as it is learned that an emergency FTR is necessary, the special agent should contact CI:IO to start the travel authorization process.
9.
After the Executive Director, CI:IO reviews the FTR for completeness, the requests are forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner, LB&:I for processing of country clearance. Foreign Travel Requests not submitted to the Executive Director, CI:IO within the specified time frames will be returned to the appropriate Director, Field Operations, unless it is an emergency request as noted in the preceding paragraph.
10.
If for any reason the travel is denied, the Deputy Commissioner, LB&:I will notify the Executive Director, CI:IO who in turn will advise the SAC of the field office requesting the travel.
11.
Special agents should contact CI:IO prior to submitting a Form 1321.
12.
Special agents traveling with their computers must contact their local Computer Operations Administrator (COA) to have the proper system changes installed prior to departing for an international post of duty.
13.
Executives and managers of CI will undertake foreign travel only when absolutely essential. Foreign Travel Requests by executives and managers will be submitted in accordance with applicable travel regulations, and will include detailed information concerning the nature of the travel, justification for the travel, and the mode of travel will be submitted with the request.
14.
See IRM 9.4.2, Sources of Information, regarding special procedures authorizing the use of a Confidential Informant/Cooperating Witness (CI/CW) which are required when the CI/CW is a foreign national, or foreign travel of a CI/CW is anticipated.
15.
The traveler will promptly notify the Executive Director, CI:IO if scheduled travel is postponed or cancelled.
9.11.2.4.2 (12-16-2011)
Travel to Canada
1.
The guidelines that apply to all foreign travel apply to travel to Canada.
2.
Consent from a taxpayer, witness, or custodian of records to be interviewed is required prior to traveling to Canada when the contact is related to a tax investigation. The required consent is governed by the United States-Canada Travel Agreement.
3.
Upon approval of the travel by the Deputy Commissioner, LB&I, the Executive Director, CI:IO will obtain the necessary clearances, furnish the originating office with the procedure to be followed and, where appropriate, the name and location of the Canadian tax official who is to be contacted by the special agent. A Canadian agent will usually accompany the special agent when third-party contacts are made.
4.
For all travel to Canada, an FTR will be prepared in accordance with the instructions provided in IRM 9.11.2.4.1, Requests for Authorization.
Oh, Tim…
Don’t you know, rules and regs are for the other, non IRS guys! 🙂
I thought according to Mopsick the IRM is supposed to be the bible for IRS Agents. There is another section of IRM dealing international travel too. I can’t say for certain that a surpise on site foriegn audit without host country consent would never occur(as the IRM does not explicitly say that) but my impression is it would probably require personal approval of Shulman(I guess it is now Stevie Millar) and Geithner and as Mopsick would say what IRS Agent with all the easy leads they have at the moment would want to get involved in something quite so messy.
Thanks for posting this.
Maybe it was the description of the ID and registration requirements but the whole thing reminded me of local TV news reports I would occasionally see in the US where the local police department would send notices to people who had an outstanding arrest warrant that they had won a prize in a raffle. Rather stupidly, some of them would turn up to claim their prize from a raffle they didn’t enter and on presentation of ID would get arrested.
That sounded like an utterly shambolic session filled with veiled threats and incorrect information. Why wouldn’t they run through the 5-10 most common forms and hit the major line items. They could start with “wages” which, depending on the country, isn’t particularly easy to explain. They just have no clue the complexity facing an ordinary person. Applying the US tax system to any country is going to throw up tons of anomalies, none of which will ever be addressed by IRS instructions (which, I am convinced, is an oxymoron, like military intelligence). I think I’ve paid more in accounting costs in the last 5 years than I spent on my bachelor’s degree and nearly 10x what I paid for my first car (used) (albeit both were many years ago).
@Badger
Thanks for the background info on the ambassador. I’m surprised at what it costs in the way of campaign contributions to get goodies from the US government. Clearly it is a big number but you also get $150k salary and probably a juiced up pension and a few $10k dinner speaking engagements thrown your way after you’ve done your tour of duty. Marc Rich’s pardon only cost about $300,000 when he had previously offered the US government $100 million to settle his case 15 years prior to the pardon.
Mr. Obama sold Ambassador Appointments for his friends who helped him raise funds for his campaign. I read in a local news paper that an Indian American made Ambassador for raising funds: http://www.josephclan.com/tjblog/?p=495 . I am sure he is qualified, but what bothers me is why he is appointed (not his qualifications but bribes).
Ambassador Barry White? Seriously? OK, it’s Saturday Night – let’s have some fun.
Let’s try to guess the ambassador’s favourite songs at these little IRS Koffee Klatches:
You See the Trouble with Me?
What Am I Gonna Do with You?
Can’t Get Enough of Your Life Savings, Babe
It’s Ecstasy When You Lay Your FBAR Forms Down Next to Me
Never, Never Gonna’ Give You Up – Even If You Renounce
You’re the First, the Last, My Everything – and I mean EVERYTHING
Practice What You Preach – But Don’t Expect Me To
All Around The FATCA World
In Your Wildest Dreams – Will You Avoid OVDI Penalties
Staying Power – The Threat Of The Exit Tax
Don’t Make Me Wait Too Long – For You To Come Clean
Playing Your Game – Is Easy Since I Hold All The Cards
I’ve Got So Much To Give – Just Kidding; I Meant Take
More evidence that diplomats do not care about the diaspora from their country. We saw this with the ridiculous old UN rules about how people with permanent residence outside of their passport country should not be allowed to work for the UN; and we see it again with garbagelike this.
Homelanders who think ambassadors are a “great service” that Washington provides to expats from our taxes are either ignorant or mendacious. I don’t need a consul who comes from the country which originated the phrase “federal pound me in the ass prison” to come visit me in when I get arrested to check on my treatment and give me the number of some Anglophone lawyer he likes, and every other “service” is recovered by user fees.
Ambassadors represent the interests of Homelanders: military, commercial, and political. These interests run directly counter to the interests of all residents of the countries where we actually live and pay taxes: they want to screw all of us out of as much as they can in exchange for as few concessions as possible.
@Gopal: A recent study says the price tag for a post in Western Europe is $750k. Only the ambassadorships in countries with oil that have to be given to career State Department employees for careful handling. Then these guys get to live and use the infrastructure and services without paying any local taxes, and our tributes to the US go to paying their salaries.
@Deckard, I’ll never think of those songs the same way again.
The ambassador’s assistant squirmed around in her chair and answered by saying renunciations would be met with strict enforcement and audits, and that no one should consider renouncing if their intention is to escape tax.
Is there any evidence of this actually happening?
@Stgeorge
But of course, no one relinquishes or renounces to escape tax. That can not be said, with the threat of life time banishment from the Reed Act hanging over ones head. Few would venture there in any public statement, but as far as renouncing goes the numbers are undoubtly going up. Why? I assume you have read this recent post by Eric.
http://bit.ly/152xJv7
Reasons, all personal, I am sure.
Re:
….”The meeting also showed that the person leading the professional embassy staff was one who believed that the US citizens living in Norway must follow the laws of USA. Renunciations will be processed under her authority, and will not be viewed favorably.”
and,
…”renunciations would be met with strict enforcement and audits”…
Sounds like they are really comfortable making blatant public threats that are in direct conflict with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 15, part 2:
Article 15.
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a15
Obviously US renunciations are politically sensitive. And a US government official issuing public threats would seem to demonstrate and intent to obstruct US citizens seeking or considering a change of nationality – by divesting themselves of the unwanted US one. The more evidence we have of this overt obstruction, the better.
I am wondering if there is anything in the manuals for embassy and consular staff that prohibits them from issuing such threats? We’ve come to expect it from the IRS, but the embassy staff is not supposed to be working to further the IRS mission.
Matthew W. Barzun Sweden $376 308
I see that Sweden topped Norway in the contributions department. That guy did his 3 year Stockholm vacation, then took the family back home again. He was replaced with the son of fame, who’s expertise is anti-corruption law
http://sweden.usembassy.gov/ambassador.html
he has been very active in promoting broader public knowledge about the challenges of overseas corruption and ways law can be used to address it
excuse me, it was a 2 yr vacation that he bought. His previous experience was in running an internet company. He had interned for John Kerry. I think we all know what interns do for their superiors, in order to get paybacks.
When I read the title, I was thinking that this was revolutionary a discussion about the US move towards residency-based taxation. Yet, instead it read that American slaves might get a lollypop between the beatings if they don’t scream to loudly. 🙁 It sucks for those who are still Americans.
@badger, the fact that the US government relies heavily on threats, scare tactics and misinformation regarding renunciations, shows that the US government acknowledges that its behavior is criminal.
@Just Me, it is undeniable that the US government has made it a tax-filing advantage to not be a US citizen. As such, Americans abroad gain with reduced tax-processing fees by renouncing US citizenship, regardless of their many reasons for renouncing, and only the US government can be blamed for such. The reason why the US government seeks to harm the innocent is because the US government acknowledges that its actions are criminal and US government is not known for admitting its faults, while blaming everyone else for them instead.
The risk of a nasty audit or interrogation from the authorities if I renounce is one of the reasons why I may still not go through with it. I still have open statutes of limitation on several years of earlier amended tax returns and FBARs which means I am at a higher risk, at least for the next three years. However, I fear that if I held off till 2016 that more laws may have been passed to make even more difficult to expatriate.
It’s a gamble, obviously. The stakes are high. If nothing else, it’s a terrifying process with all these threats hanging over my head.
“not under my authority?” Lol. Just hop over to another US embassy and apply for a visa.
“would not be viewed favorably?” Lol. What can they do about it? Relinquishment/Renunciation is a right enshrined in US law and past Supreme Court Cases. They can only deny your renunciation or relinquishment if they observe facts that show your intention is not genuine or you are under someone elses’s influence in making the decision.
In any event, I read somewhere here that the best citizenship combination in the world is Swiss and Canadian. After I get my Swiss and relinquish my American, maybe I should go for a Canadian passport :).
Your attendance at any tax seminar run by any agency of the US government, followed by a failure to come into compliance, will increase the chances of the IRS being able to assert penalties for “willful non-compliance”. Giving them your identification in order to attend the seminar will guarantee it!
@Scheiz, I’m sure you’re actually correct. I have to stop cowering to the bullies and have the resolve to do what would essentially be an act of self-defense not only for myself but also my non-U.S. husband. Otherwise, we will continue to be subject to uncertainty and burdensome compliance costs and complexity.
@monalisa,
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!